It was the science story of the week. Cartoonists had a field day. A compound in red wine called resveratrol keeps fattened mice healthy, and they live longer, too. Now that was something that the researchers could grab onto and rush, not into print, but first to the patent house. As stories in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal,and Washington Post pointed out, Harvard researcher David Sinclair has developed chemical derivatives of resveratrol and started a company called Sirtris Pharmaceuticals to commercialize their use for glucose control in diabetics. Sinclair applied for a patent on the resveratrol-like substances in May of this year. However, the subsequent science article by Sinclair and colleagues, which didn't appear in Nature until last week (and triggered the media onslaught), did not reveal that fact, nor his relationship to Sirtris.

Nature also ran a cheeky essay entitled "Grapes versus gluttony" that was co-authored by University of Washington scientist Matt Kaeberlein. For the record, neither Nature nor New York Times reporter Nicholas Wade, who quoted Kaeberlein to throw some cold water on the idea that resveratrol itself is the best way to get the desired results, revealed that Kaeberlein has applied for a patent on his own version of a resveratrol-like substance. The other major player in the news accounts was Leonard Guarente of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who discovered the gene that produces the protein that triggers the desired responses in yeast. Only the Wall Street Journal reported that he is a co-founder of Elixir Pharmaceuticals, "a biotech company that competes with Sirtris." Guarante has several patents on the gene and its use. His latest patent application filed last year is entitled simply, "Method of Extending Life Span." None of the pending patents, all of which are products of government-funded research, were revealed in the news accounts. Meanwhile, the Journal of Medical Ethics,last week published a study by the advocacy group GeneWatch UK that analyzed Nature's patent disclosures in a sampling of articles published over a six-month period last year. Two-thirds of the articles did not disclose that their authors had either outstanding patents or connections to the biotech industry. The study called for journals to impose sanctions on authors who fail to disclose conflicts of interest and suggested "universities and institutes establish a public register of scientists' interests."

Climate Researchers Prepare for Showdown

As an international panel prepares to release a new report on the risks of human-induced climate change, some American scientists involved in the report are bracing themselves for "concerted attacks" by global-warming skeptics, many of whom are industry-funded, the New Scientist reported last week. Critics have launched similar attacks in the past in an attempt to dispel the notion that human activities are affecting the world's climate, and experts predict that pattern will continue when the International Panel on Climate Change releases its report next February. The British magazine suggests the prime targets for the next round of attacks will be Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, who has argued that global warming contributed to the intensity of last year's hurricane season, and Richard Alley of Penn State University, who contends that ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica could melt faster than previously thought.

Industry-Backed Think Tank Files Brief in Global Warming Suit

The Atlantic Legal Foundation, which has received $20,000 from ExxonMobil since 1998, submitted an amicus brief to the Supreme Court late last month in support of the Environmental Protection Agency's 2003 decision not to regulate automobiles' carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act. Atlantic Legal's brief was filed on behalf of 10 scientists, including Alan Moghissi, who serves as a board member and scientific adviser for several organizations that receive funding from ExxonMobil, among them the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow and Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change. The Supreme Court is set to hear oral arguments in the case Nov. 29.

White House Probed for Suppressing Climate Research

NASA and the Commerce Department are investigating claims that the Bush administration censored government scientists' work on climate change, the Washington Post reported last week. The move comes in response to a request this fall by 14 Democratic senators that inspectors general at the two agencies look into allegations that the administration was preventing several federal climate scientists, including James Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies, from speaking freely about global warming. The results of the investigations should be released early next year.

Odds and Ends

Rep. Jay Inslee (D-Wash.) last week asked Interior Department Inspector General Earl Devaney to look into allegations that Julie MacDonald, Interior's deputy assistant secretary for fish and wildlife and parks, had ignored staff recommendations at least six times regarding the protection of plants and wildlife under the Endangered Species Act. . . A commentary by global-warming critic Paul Driessen in the Sunday Washington Times identified the author as a senior policy adviser for the Congress of Racial Equality and Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow without noting both organizations received at least $75,000 from ExxonMobil last year.

The Integrity in Science Database of Scientists and Organizations WIth Ties to Industry can be found at: www.integrityinscience.org.
Please circulate. To subscribe to Integrity in Science Watch or to send tips for inclusion in the Database, please send an email to science@cspinet.org.
If you do not wish to receive these emails, please hit reply and put "unsubscribe" in the subject line. If you receive duplicate emails from Integrity Watch, please hit reply and type "duplicate" in the subject line.